[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A5ED59C.3010805@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:24:12 +0200
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why do we probe option roms at 2K boundaries?
Hi all,
On 07/16/2009 02:08 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 16:13 -0700, Jon Smirl wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Alan Cox<alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> interrogating a data structure stored in option-rom memory. My initial
>>>> implementation involved blindly scanning from c0000 to f0000 in 512 byte
>>>> increments. Neil and others pointed out that this may not be a safe
>>> It isn't safe. If you hit certain ISA devices your system will drop dead.
>>> OTOH I doubt anyone has an intel matrix raid controller and a WD80x3 on
>>> the same box ;)
>> Random link from google, slide 21
>> http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWAR05005_WinHEC05.ppt
>>
>> PCI 3.0+ allows 512b alignment, but you must first make sure you are
>> on a PCI 3.0+ system.
>
> Thanks, I believe this may be the missing difference between my test
> system and Hans'.
>
Probably, I'll happily test any patches for this you come up with, note that I'm
leaving for a week of vacation tomorrow, so it might take some time for me to
get back to you.
Regards,
Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists